TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 33 and 27 of the CETA, 1985. During the course of verification of ER-1 returns for the periods December 2012 to February 2013 to March 2013 to June 2013, the appellant had availed CENVAT credit of the service tax on various services namely Godown Rent, Godown Maintenance, Loading and Unloading, Outside Godown Maintenance, Diesel Purchase for Genset, DG hire charges, Electricity charges, factory compliance etc. It appeared that the various services were not eligible input services and it also appeared that in terms of Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012, carrying out an intermediate production process as job work in relation to any goods on which appropriate duty is payable by the principal manufacturer is exempted from the whole o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue of products on which excise duty is paid. Therefore, credit is admissible. Further to take credit, the governing Rule 3 read with Rule 2(l) of CCR only states that, service used in relation to manufacture of final products, other than specific exclusions are input services. Hence, in the present case, once the dept does not dispute that the disputed services are used for manufacturing activity and is not covered under any of the exclusions of Rule 2(l), CCR, credit cannot be denied. Without prejudice to the above submissions, in any case, the demand is barred by limitation, as extended period is not invocable, in the absence of any conscious and deliberate suppression of fact, mis-statement, etc., He prayed that the impugned order be set....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the question of allowing CENVAT credit on such services does not arise. Secondly, as for 'management service' and 'factory compliance service' the same pertained to compliance like PF, ESI, Etc. of the employee which the department opines are in no way related to the manufacturing activity of the appellant and hence the same are not eligible for CENVAT credit. 6. I find that the first issue was examined and decided by this Tribunal in the appellants own case in Hindustan Unilever-I (supra), which is reproduced below. 3. The appellant has been denied the Cenvat credit of service tax paid on Job Work Godown Rent/Electricity Charges, Diesel Purchase for Genset, Diesel Purchase for Job Work purposes, DG Gen Set Hire Charges, on the ground ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... manufacture of final product, 4.4 In support reliance is placed on the following judgments, wherein it is held that principal manufacturer is entitled to avail credit on services used by job worker manufacturing goods on behalf of the principal manufacturer availing exemption under Notification No.214/96-CE, dated 25.03.1986: (a) Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-Ill Vs Interface Microsystems reported as 2016-TIOL-2457-CESTAT-CHD; and (b) MRF Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU, Chennai reported as 2013 (31) S.T.R. 689 (Tri-Chennai). 4.5 Further, once service tax paid by job-worker even though it was not required to be paid by them or, for that matter, the services were exempted Cenvat credit of service tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Excise, Nashik reported as 2012 (28) S.T.R. 406 (Tri. -Mumbai). 4.7 In the appellant's own case - very same Unit, the learned Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No.07 to 14/2017(C)(CEx), dated 08.03.2017, while adjudicating number of show-cause notices issued for the period Aug.' 10 to Apru'15, has held that credit of service tax paid on the job-charges as well as on various reimbursable expenses by the job-workers is admissible to the appellants, since the job-work activities are directly in relation to manufacture of final products. *** **** ***** **** 5. After hearing the learned departmental representative, I find that all the issues involved has been decided by Tribunal's precedent decision as quoted by learned c....